Page 55 - Academic and Research Book_WEB

A test study in a village outside Mumbai set out hypothetical situations in which participants had
to select the way they would allocate money for particular needs given a certain saving target. The
various saving behaviour of the groups were then analysed. The ‘real life’ situation produced a better
perception of how people’s saving behaviour than more conventional methods would have done.

Study Population as Participants with Equal Rights

Unlike a scientific study in a laboratory, in social research, the population under investigation cannot
be regarded a passive and uninvolved. Even in a straightforward empirical research project relying
entirely on quantitative methods of data collection, the study population is an active participant in the
study. Without the subjects being involved there can be no study.
Given this, the population should be involved at every stage of the study. This involves

• Sharing the objective of the study

• Obtaining informed consent by the community before the study begins
• Sharing research design
• Describing the tools to be used
It is also necessary to consider participant objections and critical comments. If the population/group is
not comfortable with the study design or a particular tool to be used and if they cannot be convinced,
then the research design needs to be reworked and the tool to be redesigned.

Confidentiality and Anonymity

These are not synonymous. Confidentiality relates to the processing of the information once it is with
the researcher and especially to the manner of its disclosure. If assured confidentiality, a participant
may demur at the disclosure of information even if there is no attribution and the researcher is
under obligation not to use the said information. In such cases the data may not be used in direct
quotations. Anonymity has to do with attribution of the information. Participants may not want their
participation to be revealed under any circumstances, even if no related information is revealed.
While anonymity may be preserved by not disclosing biographical or geographical details of the
participant, sometimes these details may be easy to infer from the other details that are provided. This
is termed deductive disclosure. Here Sim and Waterfield (2019) offer two cautions for the researcher
to keep in mind:

1. The more detailed and vivid the information, the more is the likelihood of deductive disclosure.
2. The researcher, being an outsider, may not be able to assess which particular bits of information,
when put together, may lead to unplanned disclosure.
Researchers may sometimes face a dilemma with regard to disclosure of information when their
study focuses on participants who engage in illegal activity or stigmatizing behaviour. In such cases
the researcher, “must understand the limits of confidentiality and address possible challenges to
maintaining confidentiality.” (ASA, op. cit.)

Informed Consent

Here is a topic that has generated much discussion in social research.

44 | University Grants Commission